Model 1
Regression Analysis: Sales versus SalesT_2, AdvertiseT_1
Analysis of Variance
Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F-Value | P-Value |
Regression | 2 | 16450153 | 8225076 | 93.49 | 0.000 |
SalesT_2 | 1 | 1738154 | 1738154 | 19.76 | 0.000 |
AdvertiseT_1 | 1 | 3234076 | 3234076 | 36.76 | 0.000 |
Error | 49 | 4310891 | 87977 | ||
Total | 51 | 20761043 |
Model Summary
S | R-sq | R-sq(adj) | R-sq(pred) |
296.610 | 79.24% | 78.39% | 76.08% |
Coefficients
Term | Coef | SE Coef | T-Value | P-Value | VIF |
Constant | 168 | 133 | 1.26 | 0.214 | |
SalesT_2 | 0.4177 | 0.0940 | 4.44 | 0.000 | 1.98 |
AdvertiseT_1 | 0.951 | 0.157 | 6.06 | 0.000 | 1.98 |
Regression Equation
Sales | = | 168 + 0.4177 SalesT_2 + 0.951 AdvertiseT_1 |
Model 2
Regression Analysis: Sales versus SalesT_1, AdvertiseT_2
Analysis of Variance
Source | DF | Adj SS | Adj MS | F-Value | P-Value |
Regression | 2 | 17990758 | 8995379 | 159.11 | 0.000 |
SalesT_1 | 1 | 5656199 | 5656199 | 100.05 | 0.000 |
AdvertiseT_2 | 1 | 5715 | 5715 | 0.10 | 0.752 |
Error | 49 | 2770285 | 56536 | ||
Total | 51 | 20761043 |
Model Summary
S | R-sq | R-sq(adj) | R-sq(pred) |
237.774 | 86.66% | 86.11% | 84.94% |
Coefficients
Term | Coef | SE Coef | T-Value | P-Value | VIF |
Constant | 103 | 104 | 0.99 | 0.325 | |
SalesT_1 | 0.9675 | 0.0967 | 10.00 | 0.000 | 3.36 |
AdvertiseT_2 | -0.052 | 0.165 | -0.32 | 0.752 | 3.36 |
Regression Equation
Sales | = | 103 + 0.9675 SalesT_1 - 0.052 AdvertiseT_2 |
(a) H0: Beta1 = Beta2 = 0 vs H1: At least one of Beta1 and Beta2
is not zer
(b) For model1 p values for both the parameters are 0.000. That is,
both are significant. While for model the p value for beta1 is
0.000 indicating its significance while p value for beta2 is 0.752
implying its insignificance.
(c) Model 1: R square = 0.7924 and RMSE = 2076.27
Model2: R square = 0.8666 and RMSE = 1664.42
For model1 79.24% of the variation in sales is explained by salesT-2 and AdvertiseT-1 while for model 86.66% of the variation in sales is explained by salesT-1 and AdvertiseT-2. This indicates model2 is better fit. The RMSE for model2 is smaller than that of model 1 implying that model 2 is better.
(d) conclusion is written in (b)
(e) As per model1 SalesT-2 and AdvertiseT-1 both the variables can be used to predict the sales and as per model2 SalesT-1 only can be used to predict the sales as AdvertiseT-2 is insignificant. Model2 is better fit than model1 if we compare the R square and RMSE values. Even though model1 is inferior to model2 both the variables in SalesT-2 and AdvertiseT-1 are significant. Hence it is suggested to fit another model with SalesT-1, SalesT-2 and AdvertiseT-1 as the predictors of the sales.
ill leave a like Q2. Run two multiple regression model using the following formulation, then interpret,...